High CourtsSingle Bench

Shabeer Shah vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 4 February 2021 · Citation: (2021) 02 MP CK 0044

HON’BLE JUDGES
Mohd. Fahim Anwar, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 161, 164, 437(3), 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 363, 366 (A), 376, 376 (2)(N)(j) · Protection Of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 3, 4, 6, 51
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.6120 Of 2021
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

25 paragraphs · 458 words

Mohd. Fahim Anwar, J

This is first application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C for grant of bail to the applicant, as he is arrested in connection with Crime No.625/2020,

registered at Police Station Lakhnadaun District Seoni for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366 (A), 376, 376 (2) (N) (j) of IPC & Sections

51, 6, 3, 4 of POCSO Act.

Allegation of the prosecution is that the prosecutrix aged about 17 years 4 months was missing from her residence on 26.11.2020. It is alleged that the

prosecutrix was intercepted by the applicant and other co-accused persons and they have committed sexual intercourse with her after intoxicated,

somehow she reached Nagpur from where she was recovered. Her statements under Sections 161 and 164 of Cr. P. C. were recorded. On that basis

above mentioned crime has been registered against the applicant and other co-accused persons.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent, he has not committed any offence. He has been falsely implicated in the case.

It is further submitted that the statements of the prosecutrix (P.W.2) and her mother (P.W.1) were recorded before the trial Court and they have not

supported the case of the prosecution. He is permanent residence of the address mentioned in the application. He is ready and willing t o furnish

adequate surety and will abide by all the terms and conditions imposed by this Court. He is in judicial custody since 30.11.2020. On these grounds the

prayer is made to release the applicant on bail.

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant.

Prosecutrix was marginally minor on the date of the incident and on goring through the statements of prosecutrix and her mother, it appears that they

have not supported the case of the prosecution.

Looking to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered view, that it is a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. Hence,

without expressing any opinion on merits of the matter, this M. Cr. C. is allowed.

It is directed that applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only) along

with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court to appear before the Court on the dates given by the concerned Court. It is directed

that applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 437(3) Cr.P.C.

In view of the outbreak of 'Corona Virus disease (COVID-19)' the concerned Jail Authority is directed to follow the directions/ guidelines issued by

the Government with regard to COVID-19 before releasing the applicant.

This M.Cr.C. stands allowed and disposed of.

C.C., as per rules.